Overall, I quite enjoyed ‘BFE’ as a whole piece. It was entertaining and brought the message to the stage in a relatively clear way. Was it perfect? Of course not. This is a university show where supplies, cast, and budget are limited, but I will say that i do not believe that it was a waste of my time or money. The show brought this grotesquely beautiful script to life, and that is something hard to do. For my review I will break the show down into a few separate sections: acting and performances, setting and mood, and blocking and mise-en-scene.
Acting and Performances
From the beginning we see that the casting of all characters in the actual is relatively spot on. The array of diversity of the characters in this show was hit on the nose which is often hard to do in a university show, especially a university in the South. I did, however, have a couple of issues with the casting: the age of some of the characters and the casting of ‘The Man.’ Isabel, Panny’s mother, is supposed to be in her thirties, and no matter how great the actress portraying her was, I just could not believe that she was thirty. She seemed closer to the Jack’s, the pizzaman, age, and this takes away from the desperation that Isabel is feeling when she decides to seduce Jack, presumably a college aged adolescent. Now this does not take away from the story, especially if you have not read the script, but getting this right could have just added another layer to Isabel’s character. ‘The Man’ is supposed to be this overtly charming Male. I don’t know if it was the performance or the casting or the direction, but ‘The Man’ just came off as utterly creepy and someone who was obviously a crook. Again, if you do not read the script, you will not notice this as something that is wrong with the play because in the actual play, it does work, but sticking to the writer’s choice of having a charming character would have added another layer of suspense without having to almost force suspense on us with giving us an obviously creepy character. Now, here I will say again, this is a university show and with the limited resources available, I do not really knick the play at all for these choices because they are script specific, and the play still works on many levels with the choices that were made. The performances almost across the board were fantastic. The only character who I could not fully buy into was the character of Panny. I don’t know if it was discomfort on stage or not a fully confident memorization of the script, but at times I felt that she was reciting lines from the script rather than being the character that she was supposed to be portraying. You could visibly see her thinking about what she was going to have to say next instead of just being in the moment as her character. She was not this way all the time, and I was even really into her performance at times, especially when she on the phone with Hugo. I was back and forth on if I should even mention this because at times, she was great, but if I am being honest with myself, she was not strong across the board. I has no real issue with any of the other performances in the play. Yes, some are stronger, some are weaker, but none of the other performances took me out of the play and made me realize that I was just watching people I knew. I will say, however, some of the performance were just outright great. The actress portraying Isabel was outstanding. She was almost acting circles around everyone else. Her movement, her inflection, her delivery, her emotion all really brought me into what she was trying to sell and I could not separate her from her character. The other performance I feel I should mention is the Actress that was playing Evvie. While, yes, she was good all around, I felt that she shined because of what she did for the actor portraying Lefty. He was good for the most part, but her performance was so giving in letting Lefty play off of her that anytime that he was on the stage with her, he was instantly better.
Setting and Mood
This is one of my favorite parts of the show actually, especially for a show that is this intimate. I am always a fan of sets that are very understated. This coupled with the right sound and lighting can give a performance from the cast a even truer feel, and it can actually draw you into a world even more than an elaborate set that accurately portrays the area can. It gives a chance for the story and performances to shine while not allowing for the audience to get distracted. Not that an audience is liable to always get distracted, but this is an insurance that the right things are shining through. There are plays that are meant to wow and dazzle with their elaborate sets, but this is not one of them. Sound is also very important to a production, and when you couple your understated set with the piano riffs and the sounds that were chosen, an unsettling atmosphere layers the stage with an unwarranted anticipation. Let me start with saying that use of the black boxes for almost the entire set is not only a great way to stay under budget, but it just works for me. It allows this transformation of space. Nothing has to be definite. Nothing has to always be what it was, and the use of the same boxes as representations for different sets the whole time is a creative accomplishment that works on the stage without confusing the watcher. People may complain that the space’s lack of definition may make the transitions and space hard to follow, but as a viewer, I did not experience this. This is not because I read the script either. Again, to me, it just works. It's a brilliant way to stay under budget. On top of allowing for transformation of space, it allows for an understated set. I already explained my feelings on why an understated set works better for intimate plays, and this play captured that. It allowed for the performances to be front and center, almost never to its detriment, and it trusted the script. It trusted that the play and the actors in the play could carry this story through to the end without losing the audiences focus, and that move helped the production.
Blocking
This may be the plays strongest aspect. The things that the actor are seen in and around add layers to the character and the show itself, and the blocking of the show, especially with the choice of where Hae-yoon should be is superb. It is hard to break a show with blocking and mise-en-scene, but if it is done well, it can help to make a show better than it is. It is a secondary piece that subconsciously can add layers to the show that otherwise may not be achieved. Let’s just start with one of the best choices for the entire play: the choice to put Hae-yoon physically offstage, up in the balcony for the majority of the show. For much of the show, Hae-yoon acts as an antithesis to Panny. She is like a refracted reflection of Panny. She is what Panny feels like she should be almost, and this choice adds a separation between them. This not only represents a physical separation, as Hae-yoon is thousands of miles away, but it also adds a layer of separation that represents that separation Panny feels in herself. The separation between who Panny feels she should be and who panny should actually be. When Hae-yoon runs up the stage at the end, it gives a great dramatic edge, but it closes the space between Panny and Hae-yoon. This does help to make the scene more intimate and draw the audience in more, but this is also, sadly, the closest Panny has been to who she has been trying to be this whole time, a blonde beauty that is wanted. It is a very uncomfortable way to make us think of what Panny has wanted, but this scene is not supposed to be comfortable, and it adds layers on to this script that help push the bounds of the show. The blocking of Hugo is also really smart. How close he is to Panny helps show just how close the two are, but they still have a phone in hand. This phone acts as an invisible barrier in this empty space, and it is beautiful to see them almost interact when in reality they are nowhere near each other. Even when they are sitting back-to-back talking on what is presumably Panny’s bed, we know that they are miles apart. It adds something to their relationship. They are close, we know that, but they can never be together. This choice is one of the foundations of the audience emotional response to their relationship.
Conclusion
I won’t pretend the play is perfect, but it is not bad. There are things that could be worked on like some of the performances, but there are things in this play that really work. It’s not a waste. I would’ve, and did, recommend other people to see it. The shows minimalism and blocking helps strike an emotional response into the audience that allows us to feel how intimate and serious the play actually is.
Overall, I quite enjoyed ‘BFE’ as a whole piece. It was entertaining and brought the message to the stage in a relatively clear way. Was it perfect? Of course not. This is a university show where supplies, cast, and budget are limited, but I will say that i do not believe that it was a waste of my time or money. The show brought this grotesquely beautiful script to life, and that is something hard to do. For my review I will break the show down into a few separate sections: acting and performances, setting and mood, and blocking and mise-en-scene.
Acting and Performances
From the beginning we see that the casting of all characters in the actual is relatively spot on. The array of diversity of the characters in this show was hit on the nose which is often hard to do in a university show, especially a university in the South. I did, however, have a couple of issues with the casting: the age of some of the characters and the casting of ‘The Man.’
Isabel, Panny’s mother, is supposed to be in her thirties, and no matter how great the actress portraying her was, I just could not believe that she was thirty. She seemed closer to the Jack’s, the pizzaman, age, and this takes away from the desperation that Isabel is feeling when she decides to seduce Jack, presumably a college aged adolescent. Now this does not take away from the story, especially if you have not read the script, but getting this right could have just added another layer to Isabel’s character.
‘The Man’ is supposed to be this overtly charming Male. I don’t know if it was the performance or the casting or the direction, but ‘The Man’ just came off as utterly creepy and someone who was obviously a crook. Again, if you do not read the script, you will not notice this as something that is wrong with the play because in the actual play, it does work, but sticking to the writer’s choice of having a charming character would have added another layer of suspense without having to almost force suspense on us with giving us an obviously creepy character.
Now, here I will say again, this is a university show and with the limited resources available, I do not really knick the play at all for these choices because they are script specific, and the play still works on many levels with the choices that were made.
The performances almost across the board were fantastic. The only character who I could not fully buy into was the character of Panny. I don’t know if it was discomfort on stage or not a fully confident memorization of the script, but at times I felt that she was reciting lines from the script rather than being the character that she was supposed to be portraying. You could visibly see her thinking about what she was going to have to say next instead of just being in the moment as her character. She was not this way all the time, and I was even really into her performance at times, especially when she on the phone with Hugo. I was back and forth on if I should even mention this because at times, she was great, but if I am being honest with myself, she was not strong across the board.
I has no real issue with any of the other performances in the play. Yes, some are stronger, some are weaker, but none of the other performances took me out of the play and made me realize that I was just watching people I knew. I will say, however, some of the performance were just outright great. The actress portraying Isabel was outstanding. She was almost acting circles around everyone else. Her movement, her inflection, her delivery, her emotion all really brought me into what she was trying to sell and I could not separate her from her character. The other performance I feel I should mention is the Actress that was playing Evvie. While, yes, she was good all around, I felt that she shined because of what she did for the actor portraying Lefty. He was good for the most part, but her performance was so giving in letting Lefty play off of her that anytime that he was on the stage with her, he was instantly better.
Setting and Mood
This is one of my favorite parts of the show actually, especially for a show that is this intimate. I am always a fan of sets that are very understated. This coupled with the right sound and lighting can give a performance from the cast a even truer feel, and it can actually draw you into a world even more than an elaborate set that accurately portrays the area can. It gives a chance for the story and performances to shine while not allowing for the audience to get distracted. Not that an audience is liable to always get distracted, but this is an insurance that the right things are shining through. There are plays that are meant to wow and dazzle with their elaborate sets, but this is not one of them. Sound is also very important to a production, and when you couple your understated set with the piano riffs and the sounds that were chosen, an unsettling atmosphere layers the stage with an unwarranted anticipation.
Let me start with saying that use of the black boxes for almost the entire set is not only a great way to stay under budget, but it just works for me. It allows this transformation of space. Nothing has to be definite. Nothing has to always be what it was, and the use of the same boxes as representations for different sets the whole time is a creative accomplishment that works on the stage without confusing the watcher. People may complain that the space’s lack of definition may make the transitions and space hard to follow, but as a viewer, I did not experience this. This is not because I read the script either. Again, to me, it just works. It's a brilliant way to stay under budget.
On top of allowing for transformation of space, it allows for an understated set. I already explained my feelings on why an understated set works better for intimate plays, and this play captured that. It allowed for the performances to be front and center, almost never to its detriment, and it trusted the script. It trusted that the play and the actors in the play could carry this story through to the end without losing the audiences focus, and that move helped the production.
Blocking
This may be the plays strongest aspect. The things that the actor are seen in and around add layers to the character and the show itself, and the blocking of the show, especially with the choice of where Hae-yoon should be is superb. It is hard to break a show with blocking and mise-en-scene, but if it is done well, it can help to make a show better than it is. It is a secondary piece that subconsciously can add layers to the show that otherwise may not be achieved.
Let’s just start with one of the best choices for the entire play: the choice to put Hae-yoon physically offstage, up in the balcony for the majority of the show. For much of the show, Hae-yoon acts as an antithesis to Panny. She is like a refracted reflection of Panny. She is what Panny feels like she should be almost, and this choice adds a separation between them. This not only represents a physical separation, as Hae-yoon is thousands of miles away, but it also adds a layer of separation that represents that separation Panny feels in herself. The separation between who Panny feels she should be and who panny should actually be. When Hae-yoon runs up the stage at the end, it gives a great dramatic edge, but it closes the space between Panny and Hae-yoon. This does help to make the scene more intimate and draw the audience in more, but this is also, sadly, the closest Panny has been to who she has been trying to be this whole time, a blonde beauty that is wanted. It is a very uncomfortable way to make us think of what Panny has wanted, but this scene is not supposed to be comfortable, and it adds layers on to this script that help push the bounds of the show.
The blocking of Hugo is also really smart. How close he is to Panny helps show just how close the two are, but they still have a phone in hand. This phone acts as an invisible barrier in this empty space, and it is beautiful to see them almost interact when in reality they are nowhere near each other. Even when they are sitting back-to-back talking on what is presumably Panny’s bed, we know that they are miles apart. It adds something to their relationship. They are close, we know that, but they can never be together. This choice is one of the foundations of the audience emotional response to their relationship.
Conclusion
I won’t pretend the play is perfect, but it is not bad. There are things that could be worked on like some of the performances, but there are things in this play that really work. It’s not a waste. I would’ve, and did, recommend other people to see it. The shows minimalism and blocking helps strike an emotional response into the audience that allows us to feel how intimate and serious the play actually is.